However, here are 10 Reasons that progressives ought to be
interested in supporting Israel:

1.
Historically, Israel, not the Arab countries, have been more supportive
of progressive values. One only has to look at how people live in
those respective areas (including Gaza) to see which supports human
rights more. Where are the counter-demonstrations in Gaza or the West
Bank? They are everywherein Israel. Yet, in Gaza, even during relative peacetime, protesters are routinely arrested.

2.
Israel was a progressive cause, once. It's a given that progressives
support the "underdog" but they should also see what those forces wish
for their people if they succeed. Hamas is a militant-led entity,
barely capable of governance, and might even morph into an ISIS-like
State (both are Sunni), given the chance. Hamas is a militarized affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, now banned in Egypt, where Hamas is equally unpopular. Egypt has refused to even consider opening the gates at Rafah. One has to wonder: why are the Palestinians, or at least their most militant leadership, so unpopular even among their supposed brethren in the Arab lands?

3.
Does Israel have the right to defend itself or not? If not, than that
is basically calling for its elimination, and writers, pundits, and self-styled "advisers" should be open and
up front about that.

- Advertisement -

4.
The term "occupier" is tossed around too loosely. If Israel is truly
occupying Gaza, why did they pull out in 2005, under Sharon? And what
do writers suggest they do to rein in the Gaza militants (I've even read
that it is Israel's duty, as "occupiers" to protect Gaza civilians), if
not to take out the militants and become the de facto, or even de jure,
police and army in Gaza? That's, after all, what occupation means.
Is this what the citizens of Gaza, or Israel, want? One cannot have it both ways.

5.
Gaza militants do in fact, launch their rockets (not missiles, because they lack internal guidance)
from heavily populated areas. This may be a tactical decision to keep them hidden from view, or political
decision to increase the civilian body count when Israel retaliates, but in either case, it shows the Hamas priority is violence, attack,
and vengeance, not preservation of Gaza civilian life. How is that a progressive value?

6.
Is it right to accept, at face-value, the alleged "support" from the Gaza populace
for the militants, or, as we have seen so often in the terrorized Arab
lands, is that support merely a survival tactic (e.g. Iraqis "supported"
Hussein until it was clear he was ousted, then they didn't. Same with
Libya. I'm not saying we should have gone into either of those
countries, or into Ukraine currently either - we made a complete mess
out of all of them, but one does have to be skeptical of mobs rallying
at the point of a gun.
Self-preservation is always priority #1 in dictatorships).

If
it's only the third one of these, than Israel can be a Jewish state
based on a set of secular laws and traditions (even including things
like respect for education, a secular court and the rule of law, democratic elections, etc.). One can be a "Jew" simply by agreeing to these laws and traditions, without being a "religious" or "racial" Jew.

The second definition based on race
doesn't make a lot of sense because there are supposedly 12 tribes
of Israel scattered all over the world, in modern times (see above). It does come up from
racists and neo-Nazis, however, and this cannot be ignored, nor can clearly counter-factual and insulting comparisons of Jews to Nazis and Genocidals (in
point of fact, 1,800 dead
Gazans out of 1.8 million is .1% of the population. Israel lost a full 1% of its
population during its war for independence and many more since then, and the Soviets lost a full
10% - over 20 million - during WWII, and no one claimed these were
"genocides." The Holocaust, which was responsible for the death of 6 million Jews, and which some Gazans and Arabs deny or ignore, was a genocide, by all historical and common definitions).

If it's #1, then it's a question
of whether the State can tolerate freedom of religion, to be Jewish or
not to be Jewish. If it can't, it's a theocracy (I submit most of the
Arab lands are this, to a greater or lesser degree, and if you read the
Hamas charter I linked to previously, you can see this is clearly their
goal for Palestine. It is a fair thing to ask how Islam as the basis
for the beliefs of a State like Iran or Saudi Arabia is working out for
them, and for the world). I don't believe Israel is a theocracy but its own fundamentalists, who also happen to have
large numbers of children, may be pushing it that way, as is the die-off
of the traditionally secular, moderate "liberal" class of Israelis and
its replacement with a much harder line generation.

This is not a trivial question then, and how one answers it can determine the fate of Israel as a nation.

10. Israel is a more democratic country than even America, and other democratic countries. Israel's parliamentary Knesset is known for its wide-ranging, sometimes raucous, environment, where even minority parties have a strong voice. Certainly it is a more diverse body than our American two-party duopoly.